Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41995896›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2026

Developing an Integrity Policy for a Technical University: The Case of TU Delft.

Sabine Roeser, Samantha Copeland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sabine RoeserEthics and Philosophy of Technology Section, Department of Values, Technology and Innovation, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, TU Delft, Jaffalaan 5, Delft, 2628 BX, The Netherlands. S.Roeser@tudelft.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0570-945X
Samantha CopelandEthics and Philosophy of Technology Section, Department of Values, Technology and Innovation, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, TU Delft, Jaffalaan 5, Delft, 2628 BX, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Integrity is an increasingly important topic at universities, due to more awareness as well as due to internal and external challenges. This paper tells the story of the development of the integrity infrastructure at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, a leading engineering university, We write this paper as academics and philosophers working at TU Delft and as members of the committees and working groups that, over the previous decade, took up the question of how to ensure integrity within our university. Thereby we also engaged with the question of what integrity at a university ought to be like as well as who has which responsibilities to support it. In this paper we will discuss key narrative themes that arose from the insights gained through this process. The intention in sharing this story is to guide fellow academics in similar positions, struggling to identify the needs of faculty, staff and students, who wish to act with integrity but who require institutional support and clear guidance to do so. In particular, we wish to highlight a key tension, between the need to formalise general basic requirements and the wish to have clear thresholds for good and bad behaviour, and the daily practice of integrity which requires context-sensitive awareness, respect, diversity, open-mindedness and continuous engagement with any principles laid down. We present our case through narrative form in order to trace both the points where and how this tension took form, and to note potential leverage points in such processes for others. The process of creating an integrity infrastructure, that is, both embodies and illustrates this tension as well as offering some ways to ease or accommodate it. Further, we present in this paper a key contribution of the integrity policy developed at TU Delft: the creation of an infrastructure and Code of Conduct that attend not only to academic integrity, but draw out and enact the responsibility frameworks and duties entailed by social and organizational integrity as well, which together constitute the three pillars of TU Delft’s integrity policy. As academic integrity relates to issues such as research ethics, social integrity relates to behavior between people (employees and students), and organizational integrity relates to issues such as conflicts of interest and collaborations with external parties. Of course, challenging situations will often involve aspects that fall under more than one of these pillars, but the pillars help to provide conceptual clarity. In this way the integrity infrastructure developed at TU Delft is richer and more ambitious than policies that focus primarily on what we call ‘academic integrity’.

Indexed as

EngineeringOrganizational PolicySocial ResponsibilityTechnologyAcademiaFacultyHumansNetherlandsUniversitiesAcademic research integrityCode of conductEthicsTechnologyUniversity integrity policy

Identifiers

PMID41995896
PMCPMC13230284

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.